Putting the US of A ahead isn't collectivism (at least in the sense of that word) its Patriotism and belief in the American dream and the American exceptionalism.

Look at all the bad stuff you mentioned, slavery for example. More then half a million men died fighting against slavery because they believed it to be wrong. Quite a few more died defending us against totalitarianism of communists and fascists. No too many of them though they were fighting for some evil or corrupt empire. They believed in the common tenets that the individual, when left to his own devices will flourish. That is a historical anamoly, and it has been a grand experiment that is our country. Its not been easy but the fact that we are so rich and prosperous is because so much turmoil has happened and we, as a nation, overcame it.

We have come farther in 250 years addressing the issues of race and culture then anyone else. To say that you have a problem with our past shows, with all due respect, a lack of understanding of history.

If you don't like the government, you are very welcome to be active in politics, VOTE, and lobby your representatives. However, in doing so you must understand that all politics is left behind at the border. To the outside we need to speak with one voice and show unity as Americans. Otherwise, its divide and conquer.

To say I have a problem with our past shows a lack of understanding of history? Are you saying you have no problem with the government injecting poor black men who had no idea what they were doing (they were told they had "bad blood") with syphilis?

Putting the nation ahead of the individual is collectivism, that's its DEFINITION.

Our nation is one of the most free in the world, but it could be a hell of a lot better. We've done bad shit in our past, and might in the future. The draft in Vietnam wasn't that long ago.

So are we still injecting anyone with syphilis? Or keeping slaves? Not that I am aware of. Was there not a movement to stop these things which involved extreme hardship and sacrifice?

You can, with a clear conscience, look back and say that many of these ills were overcome. That doesn't make the ills themselves any better, but the fact that people put life and limb on the line to make a better country is something that seems to be forgotten by many (perhaps even selectively in some cases).

Collectivism would be everyone doing the same thing, a cog in the machine type of deal. I would expound on this some more but I have to be at work in about 5 hours.

At this point in time no one (who matters) supports the draft since we have a professional army which would not be compatible with a conscripted army.

As far as Vietnam (which was the last draft and I am opening another can of worms here), every military engagement between us and the north resulted in our win. They won at the time because this was not fought as a total war by our government and subverted by various pro-communist movements domestically. Quater of a century later, Vietnam is looking to be more like us then like Ho Chi Mihn's or Marx.

The experiences from there led to a more capable and smaller military which does not require the mass conscription needed in prior wars.

I agree that the army today does not support conscription due to logistic reasons.

My point wasn't about logistic reasons. It was about individualism and freedom. Conscription is involuntary servitude, and supporting it is the ultimate in subjecting individual authority to collective and totalitarian governance.

Vietnam was fought badly, but it was not a war we should have fought.

P.S. And as for bad shit the U.S. is doing right now to its citizens, check out Kelo v. New London

P.S. And as for bad shit the U.S. is doing right now to its citizens, check out Kelo v. New London

Could it really be? After 9 pages of reading about what I wasted much of my time debating in college, an item that piques my interest? Do yourselves a favor if you do check it out and be sure to read Thomas's dissent.

As to the rest of the thread, I'd rather not be sucked into yet another one of these discussions, but I will say that all of the moral relativists on this thread are...well, oh never mind. But as to loveswatching's mindless drivel, I'm ashamed/scared that that kind of crap has reached my home county of Du Page.

As to the rest of the thread, I'd rather not be sucked into yet another one of these discussions, but I will say that all of the moral relativists on this thread are...well, oh never mind. But as to loveswatching's mindless drivel, I'm ashamed/scared that that kind of crap has reached my home county of Du Page.

Oh great we got an another Israeli apologist on the board, Someone who claims not to get involved but couldn't help to step in to blow his trumpet. Dude i am glad you aint in dupage no more, one less sheep to worry about.

^^Maybe the poster was thinking about the emotion in your posts. Sometimes It is hard to have a conversation with someone who seems to be speaking with emotions. The only reason that topics usually get locked is due to this reason. No offense.

^^Maybe the poster was thinking about the emotion in your posts. Sometimes It is hard to have a conversation with someone who seems to be speaking with emotions. The only reason that topics usually get locked is due to this reason. No offense.

none taken

I was unaware that emotion can be transferred correctly through text, thanks for bringing it to my notice.

and avatar most of us have put two and two together and know you're a jew. its ok. the only thing that would make it more obvious is if you talked about the university of pennsylvania half as much as chicago.

Let's also keep in mind that historically, Muslims and the spread of Islam has been MUCH more tolerant than Christianity (remember those pesky crusades?).

Excuse me, but I believe Muhammad said to spread Islam with the sword? Furthermore, for hundreds of years the Muslims were trying to invade Europe; finally, in the 1700s it was stopped in Austria by a joint European effort. They were not pushed back entirely which is why Islam remains a dominant religion in some areas of the Balkans.

Of course, none of that matters today as some places in Europe will have near-Muslim majorities in less than 100 year.

Quote:

Originally Posted by avatar

Yes, you are right, Israel attacked Lebanon for harboring Hizballah terrorists. Why? Not just for fun - because Hizballah attacked first. Israel, in this war, and in EVERY war, engaged in a war of self-defense.

Israel, a first world nation of 5 million people who gets the most U.S aid funding because why?

I recently read an article that described it as "political suicide" for any senator to support actions that would be detrimental to Israel, why?

Why does the United States automatically veto any action detrimental to Israel in the UN? (there are literally DOZENS of resolutions against Israel in the UN, of course the UN vetos any sanctions or such against Israel).

Why are Israel's interests put infront of the United States and why does AIPAC have so much power? (The Usual Suspects screamed when Mearsheimer released his paper with Walt).

Why does Israel continue to occupy the West Bank in settlements declared illegal by the UN? If Israel is so concerned with peace why do they not just let the Palestinians live rather then building more settlements on their land and placing Israelis there in hope of taking the territory in sheer number? How do they expect the Palestinians to react?

Israel's actions in Lebanon were criminal. They used the US-funded Jets of Zion to screech overhead and bomb factories, water supplies, and electricity stations. Sickening. If it wasn't for the United States, Israel's warcrimes would have been put to an end long ago.

To act as if Israel is some sort of innocent victim is really getting old and the mask is coming off. The times of screaming "anti-Semite" because you dared question Israel, while questioning any other country is okay, is at an end.

Edit: I actually wrote up a response for those in support of multiculturalism; unfortunately, because of prior history and a recent 3-day ban, I decided not to post them, if anyone is interested in how multiculturalism is not benefit for any nation, they can PM me.

Putting the US of A ahead isn't collectivism (at least in the sense of that word) its Patriotism and belief in the American dream and the American exceptionalism.

I view libertarianism and uber-individualism as bad as communism. I will not discuss my political leanings any further in this thread.

Quote:

Originally Posted by maxim

Look at all the bad stuff you mentioned, slavery for example. More then half a million men died fighting against slavery because they believed it to be wrong.

Not exactly true. The Civil War was more to keep the union together rather than slavery. I somehow doubt those Union soldiers simply fought because they believed slavery was wrong.

Quote:

Originally Posted by maxim

Quite a few more died defending us against totalitarianism of communists and fascists. No too many of them though they were fighting for some evil or corrupt empire. They believed in the common tenets that the individual, when left to his own devices will flourish.

Not really. The Japanese soldiers fought for their nation, much like the Germans did for Germany, the Soviets for the Soviet Union, etc etc.

Quote:

Originally Posted by maxim

That is a historical anamoly, and it has been a grand experiment that is our country. Its not been easy but the fact that we are so rich and prosperous is because so much turmoil has happened and we, as a nation, overcame it.

We really haven't had too much turmoil in our history. Or at least not any more than the average nation of Europe. We're prosperous because of a culture that promotes work and a highly educated people who brought with them the technology of Europe and were able to expand upon that and build the United States into a world superpower.

Zeitgeist: I agree with you about the War Between the States, it was in no way fought to eliminate slavery, that was a PR gig. Also, have you read Mearsheimer's other works other than The Israel Lobby? If so, what do you think of his theory?

I didn't have the patience to read through the whole thread, but just in response to the first post: Shit like that does happen in Iran, it's not propaganda as some people have said. And to those who are comparing Christian brutality in earlier times to islam, ask yourself this: how is it that the whole of the middle east and northern africa became muslim? It's not by handing out flyers and hoping people would convert. Also, most people hear the words shi'a and sun'i without even knowing what the hell it means. It's another good example of how islam is far from being anything remotely close to a pacifist religion. On that basis alone, no, that article doesn't surprise me.

As a rule of thumb, the middle east is a shit hole with lots of crazy people who have little value for life, and we're all much much much much better here. At the risk of sounding anymore politically incorrect than i already have, I'll end it there. Kthxbye